2016 (12) TMI 834

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he appellant Sh. Amresh Jain, AR for the Revenue ORDER Per Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra The present appeal has been filed against the order No. 78(VC)CE//JPR-I/2013 dated 29.07.2013, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Customs & Central Excise, Jaipur. The period of dispute is from July 2006 to September 2006 and April 2007 to September 2007. 2. The brief facts of the case are that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... per bottle contending that the goods were meant to be samples and not sold. Thereafter, appellant started paying excise duty on the sample bottles under Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules i.e. cost of production plus 10% under protest. The objection raised by the Department culminated into the issuance of periodical show cause notices. The impugned notices alleged that that the bottles of lens care so....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....respect of the small bottles of 60 ml of Lens Care Solution is the correct assessable or the value has to be raised, by adopting the value of the full commercial bottle of 120 ml. We note that an identical issue was considered by the Tribunal in the case of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Versus Commissioner of C. Ex., Surat-II reported in 2005 (183) E.L.T. 42 (Tri.- Mumbai) = 2005 TIOL 123 CESTAT -....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ills the requirement of Section 4 (1)(a) of Central Excise Act, 1944. The fact that physician samples were further given free of cost by the distributors as no price was charged by the distributors, the case cannot be held to be not covered by the provisions of Section 4 (1) (a) of the Act. The said argument of the Revenue would be fallacious and wrong reason. The transaction is between the assess....